Wallaby 31 players for 2015 RWC

[Gnostic]

The difference is that a small weakness exposed at Super Rugby level is a glaring weakness at Test level, the Reds inability to create some attack off those line outs won't be reflected by the Springboks or All Blacks.

Its about picking a balanced side and playing tactics to suit that side.

You will remember that I was one who understood and supported Deans election to play McCalman at 7 against the Irish. I still hold that the idea wasn't the problem, it was the planning and execution that were the problem. Why play a game plan that requires an on ball/ruck 7 when you haven't selected one?

Similarly if somebody like Skelton is selected his lack of lineout skills has to be balanced with other selections and tactical ability at that set piece.

As others have said, the alternative is to continue doing what the Wallabies have for the last how many years and that has had what sort of results?

This isn't just a philosophy for Skelton.

Anyway enough said.

 

[wamberal]

The biggest problem against the Oirish was that McCabe kept going into contact too bloody high........

 

[qwerty51]

He shouldn't have been cutting back into the loose forwards in the first place. That was the go to 1st phase move. Ioane's absence was arguably the biggest because he was the key 1st phase player.

 

[Braveheart81]

Anyway, looking at players in isolation is a bit pointless since one players strengths or weaknesses can be offset/mitigated by another players selections.

My comments earlier about a line-out specialists weren't made exclusively in reference to Simmons, i remember someone posting earlier this year that Mowen's line out skills weren't as important as they are made out to be and a player shouldn't be selected on their line out ability. Which i strongly disagree with, to me a locks line-out ability is almost proportionately as important as a props scrummaging ability..

I think the first paragraph of this post is absolutely correct. It's about picking a team that can get everything done rather than trying to get every player to be all things.

You could pick a Rob Simmons type player at 4, 5 and 6 and have an absolutely dominant lineout. It probably won't win you many games though because that team will be lacking in other areas. One Rob Simmons with a couple of other decent jumpers should give you a solid lineout and can let you play someone like Skelton who provides a ball running and offloading game together with excellent maul defence.

Skelton offers something very different. The first second rower in history who cannot win his share of lineouts. That's okay against second rate opposition, but it is not okay against top quality sides.

He's also the biggest player Australia has ever fielded and his size combined with his skill is a useful weapon.

He showed pretty quickly in his debut test that his size is an asset that other teams can have a great deal of trouble mitigating.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Yet the Reds despite being well off the pace mitigated Skelton pretty well on Saturday night. The question is was it just a bad night for Will, or was he just shut down well?

 

[qwerty51]

Mitigated in what way? He stopped all the Reds mauls effectively and the Reds mauling has been pretty good all year. His cleanouts were good as well, got low and drove over the ball which often gave the Tahs solid ball.

 

[Train Without a Station]

He gave away multiple penalties including a ruck penalty which was solely due to his poor work at the breakdown and not Gill's good work as the commentators incorrectly tried to claim (but the commentators continued love for Gill and willing to disregard all other player's good work to credit to Gill is a point for another day), minimal run metres or line break assists.

We was able to defend the Red's mauls really well when the Waratahs knew we were not going to go wide and therefore were able to set up to defend them well and not waste other defenders in the air. In test rugby against quality opponents we aren't going to always have that luxury.

He also contributed to a line out that got no clean ball all night. My point being if Saturday night is the effect he is going to have around the park, he's a liability due to how he hamstrings the line out. Which gets back to my point, was Saturday night him well nullified, or was it just an off night? He's still in only his second season. A number of quality young players have found it hard to keep up the momentum by this time of the season and maybe he's just getting a little flat too.

 

[cyclopath]

Skelton needs consistency. As do many young players with minimal big game experience show, there are ups and downs. His good bits are very good, but his deficiencies need to be mitigated better. He'll never be a first strike lineout weapon, but he could be better and he can be used as an option if used smarter, and his accuracy at breakdowns can be sharper.
This is why I think he is still a squad player, maybe in the 23 depending on who we are playing, but still not cemented at all.
Work in progress.

 

[Train Without a Station]

If we had an injury or two I wouldn't be too worried about Skelton being a starting player. I consider he has the same deficiencies as Timani did with considerably more strengths. But I also think other players offer a little more all-round value as first choice options, all things being equal.

Depending on who we are playing is a valid point. I would like to see his scrummaging (or technique really) improve and his work rate pick up a little though. If he does that, his attacking work and physicality really make up for his line out weakness and what will still be a slightly lower work rate.

 

[qwerty51]

Well it's not going to improve under Cheika because he barely works on scrums. He scrummaged fine in the 3rd Test for the most part and Blades/Link will give him a good working over.

 

[Braveheart81]

Yet the Reds despite being well off the pace mitigated Skelton pretty well on Saturday night. The question is was it just a bad night for Will, or was he just shut down well?

I think he just had a pretty quiet night.

Clearly the experiment of getting him more involved in the lineout calling was a failure and won't be repeated anytime soon.

The Reds, particularly their forwards were better than the scoreline indicated but I also don't think you can be too harsh on any one Waratahs player when their side won by over 30 points.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Palu is a lineout option too don't forget. Three is enough with Simmons to run it based on what we saw against the Frogs.

I think Cliff is a marginal line out option at best. He is better utilised as first receiver after a line out rather than being one of the jumpers imo. That being the case (if it is) I don't think we can have both Will and Cliff on the field together. Start with Simmons and Carter as locks and Cliff at 8, and bring Will on later in the game when Cliff comes off. We would then need a jumping 8 to come on with Will to keep three jumpers in the lineout. ATM my preference would be Hoiles. Horwill then becomes the backup for Simmons in case of injury.

 

[Pfitzy]

Yet the Reds despite being well off the pace mitigated Skelton pretty well on Saturday night. The question is was it just a bad night for Will, or was he just shut down well?

Off the pace? Reds forwards played pretty well from all reports. Was your backs who fluffed it.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I haven't checked the stats but I believe we spent more time in the Waratahs 22 than vice versa, had equal-ish possession, and had parity to dominance in the set piece. I'd also have to check to be certain but we had more line breaks I read somewhere, where as the Waratahs only had a line break for every try. One team was efficient and capitalised on their chances. The other team blew all there's as they were unable to maintain the same composure in their performance.

Barring set piece it was a fairly even forward performance I thought. Skelton was one of the quieter forwards on the night.

 

[TOCC]

Reds forwards were better at the set piece, were on par with the Tahs at the breakdown and were completely outclassed in the backs...

Sheesh, that's like the polar opposite of Reds vs Tahs of 2011..

 

[Scrubber2050]

Flagged this some time ago - now there appears some fire out of the smoke.

Kurtley looking likely to flip over to Rugby League and probably the Bulldogs.

Whilst I think the bloke would excel at RL (more so than Quade) it would be quite devastating to the Wallabies in their RWC campaign.

He has also been terrific for the Tahs this year.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Meh. He's at best going to be a bench player or injury replacement. Playing great rugby now, but isn't the best 10 in NSW, the best 12 in Australia nor the best 15.

If he wants to throw his toys out of the cot instead of working hard on moving back up the pecking order that's ARU top up money better spent on Karmichael Hunt. He can tackle too.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think Beale will end up staying in rugby with the Tahs for another year or two.

His Waratahs contract will see a substantial increase from a fairly low base and he'll have a Wallabies top up so I don't think the overall money differential compared with going to the NRL will be huge.

 

[qwerty51]

I don't believe for one second he's going to the NRL before 2015. Unlike others who have left Beale is a deadset certainty to be in the World Cup 23 and wouldn't give up that opportunity.

 

[Brumbieman]

Fuck him.


If he wants to go, let him. If he's that small minded and doesn't think the Wallaby/Waratah jersey (after all the help they've given him him getting him through rehab etc) is worthy of enough to respect to just enter into negotiations without pulling the 'but i'll run away if you don't think i'm the best' rugby league option....

...then he can fuck off.

I'm sick of these smartarse kids treating the jersey like a job, and not respecting it enough to do the honourable thing. IMO anytime there is a single whiff of a rugby league threat being played in negotiations, the offer should be immediately tabled that you re-sign on the same contract value/deals etc that you're currently on, and you've got one week to take it, otherwise you get to go play at the Bulldogs, glass your missus and shag dogs, as it's clearly the quality of life you deserve.